If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Matt
That is incorrect. While not posted on the wall all you have to do is ask. Most people just don't ask. All doctors and hospitals in Florida anyway have to provide you with prices if you ask. It is an even better idea to ask if you don't have insurance becasue then you know what you are going to be charged and that price can be modified to meet insurance reimbursments.....just ask.

Thanks Corey. Good info.

Matt McKenzie

"Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is probably the reason why so few engage in it." Henry Ford

I don't want higher taxes! I pay enough taxes now--actually more than enough.

I don't want to pay for more than my own!

I don't want to pay for illegal aliens!

I don't like birthright citizenship when the parents are illegal aliens!

I don't like birthright citizenship being responsible for inflating the welfare/entitlement roles!

I don't want a government analyst telling me which medical care I can have and which is not available!

Insurance companies are FOR PROFIT companies. No one has to buy insurance--they can take the gamble that they will spend less if they only spend when needed vs. monthly payments. Except--you can't do that with car insurance, home insurance, etc. because there is a greater liklihood in this country that you will be sued for some--often frivilous issue.

We need to stand up and be counted--not "taken care of". We need to assume personal responsibility and get the goverment the heck out of it.

Matt
That is incorrect. While not posted on the wall all you have to do is ask. Most people just don't ask. All doctors and hospitals in Florida anyway have to provide you with prices if you ask. It is an even better idea to ask if you don't have insurance becasue then you know what you are going to be charged and that price can be modified to meet insurance reimbursments.....just ask.

They don't ask because they don't care. Why should they? They are not paying. In medicine where they do advertise, and the client pays, boob jobs and such, costs have gone down.

Socialize medicine becomes rationed medicine. I don't want government making those decisions. Remember the UK model

You're absolutely right and that's why we have rationing now (e.g., the time to get an appointment with my orthopedic surgeon averages 3-4 months and even longer for my urologist). A number of factors contribute to delivery problems in medicine in England, in other countries, and here. In this country, the growth of managed care programs and the increasing bureaucratization of third party payment plans (i.e. private insurance) has contributed to a decline in job satisfaction among physicians at a time when medical schools are attempting to expand enrollment by 30% to keep up with demand. This is contributing to major shortages in certain specialties and areas of the country that are likely to grow worse.

The socialized medicine you fear is already here. It is generally privately administered (even Medicare is privately administered), but no less intrusive. Much of the money that previously went to health care providers now goes to a variety of administrative "benefit managers" and their shareholders. Prices paid to direct providers -- doctors and hospitals -- are now largely dictated by the major carriers in a very one-sided "negotiation".

However, we continue to talk about the illusion of a private health care system even though it largely disappeared in the 80's and 90's. Interestingly, the loudest voices now opposing "socialization" are the benefit managers and pharmaceutical companies that have profited most from their ability to reap double digit profit growth even in a declining economy as a result of their political victories in achieving increased public funding with virtually no accountability or liability. None of these companies is looking to return to a "free market" where consumers would actually have to pay for their care because that would drastically reduce consumption and profits. Rather, they want to continue to be able to suck revenues with as little visibility as possible from all of our pockets.

Our choices are simple:

1. return to paying our own medical bills directly

2. continue the current system and watch 20-25% of GDP going to medical care with almost no improvement in life expectancy over the next 5-10 years.

In some ways I tend to believe we might be better off with a reset that implements option 1. However, I don't think that many of us are prepared to pay our own ways. Given that, I favor option 3 rather than continuing to pretend in the beneficence of the foxes that now guard the hen house.

FWIW- I just made an appointment with my orthopedic doc today for next week. Our urology patients are usually seen in 5 days or less with surgery taking place within three weeks. I guess it depends on where you are at.

I personaly think option number 1 is the best. Overall medical prices should drop without insurance and increased competition among doctors

Views and opinions expressed herein by Badbullgator do not necessarily represent the policies or position of RTF. RTF and all of it's subsidiaries can not be held liable for the off centered humor and politically incorrect comments of the author.
Corey Burke

You're absolutely right and that's why we have rationing now (e.g., the time to get an appointment with my orthopedic surgeon averages 3-4 months and even longer for my urologist). A number of factors contribute to delivery problems in medicine in England, in other countries, and here. In this country, the growth of managed care programs and the increasing bureaucratization of third party payment plans (i.e. private insurance) has contributed to a decline in job satisfaction among physicians at a time when medical schools are attempting to expand enrollment by 30% to keep up with demand. This is contributing to major shortages in certain specialties and areas of the country that are likely to grow worse.

The socialized medicine you fear is already here. It is generally privately administered (even Medicare is privately administered), but no less intrusive. Much of the money that previously went to health care providers now goes to a variety of administrative "benefit managers" and their shareholders. Prices paid to direct providers -- doctors and hospitals -- are now largely dictated by the major carriers in a very one-sided "negotiation".

However, we continue to talk about the illusion of a private health care system even though it largely disappeared in the 80's and 90's. Interestingly, the loudest voices now opposing "socialization" are the benefit managers and pharmaceutical companies that have profited most from their ability to reap double digit profit growth even in a declining economy as a result of their political victories in achieving increased public funding with virtually no accountability or liability. None of these companies is looking to return to a "free market" where consumers would actually have to pay for their care because that would drastically reduce consumption and profits. Rather, they want to continue to be able to suck revenues with as little visibility as possible from all of our pockets.

Our choices are simple:

1. return to paying our own medical bills directly

2. continue the current system and watch 20-25% of GDP going to medical care with almost no improvement in life expectancy over the next 5-10 years.

In some ways I tend to believe we might be better off with a reset that implements option 1. However, I don't think that many of us are prepared to pay our own ways. Given that, I favor option 3 rather than continuing to pretend in the beneficence of the foxes that now guard the hen house.

Why do doctors not advertise prices(Even back when it was just hospitalization coverage we had they didn't)? Is the limiting of doctors by the AMA purely quality control or does it include profit control? Is this not antitrust, especially the first question?